MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #9

[Lovejac]

Interesting! And helpful! TY!

And it's Braveheart :crush:

 

[Ladylub]

OK how about this. Let's just say that MB did walk over to the window and started throwing punches unprovoked. Let's say the gun was in the holster and MB went for it and somehow we knew his intent was to kill. But he couldn't get the gun so he ran away... Is it still ok for A LEO to gun him down as he is walking away or is the proper response to Point your gun at him and order him to raise his hands and get on his knees?

Didn't they tell the officer they were not getting out the street b/c they were close to their destination?

If they told him that and then all the rest happened I think any cop would assume that if he is heading off there is a likelihood of him grabbing a weapon at the destination and coming back. He already hit officer at least once why would anyone think they were done.

 

[CoolJ]

Prof. Parcells said a wound on Brown’s right arm was “consistent with a witness statement” that Brown was first shot while facing away from Wilson, but he stressed that he and Dr. Baden could not determine conclusively the trajectories of the bullets that hit Brown—or which direction he was moving—when he was shot. The wounds “could be consistent with going forward or going backward,” Dr. Baden said.

 

[CARIIS]

I think this is one thing that keeps media " stuck" we are still waiting. Autopsy is a violent mean chopping dicing activiey posted details and links earlier.

http://www.newscientist.com/article...y-unlikely-to-solve-mystery.html#.U_foFWPSpwQ

 

[CoolJ]

http://www.newsweek.com/what-we-learned-michael-browns-autopsy-265247

 

[CoolJ]

You can find links to support pretty much anything you want... That's how messed up this case is.

It reminds me of the pharmaceutical industry..

 

[AuburnTxTiger]

that assulting a police officer is a felony. It's not like punching someone in a bar fight. Just like killing an officer is a capital offense in many states. LE is a special class of victim with more serious penalties. No one has the right to get physical with LE. It's a felony even if it happens via reckless behavior rather than an intentional act and includes hitting or injuring an officer while under the influence. But an intentional assault carries mandatory jail time.

I honestly can't think of a legal basis for the decedent to have a "tussle" with the officer and have heard no facts which would explain it as an innocent event. Elements of the story that came from certain people like the friend who was with him are simply not plausible IMO. To me, there is no way the officer would not have exited or intended to exit his vehicle to interact with the decedent and friend after the first verbal encounter. It is not plausible, IMO, that the officer decided to sit in his car and reach thorugh the window to physically deal with the decedent. Makes zero sense. It sounds like someone was trying to prevent him from exiting his vehicle at the least and most have indicated that the decedent was reaching into the vehicle and the officer was injured so that itself is a felony.

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5650000082.htm



It is also against the law to even place the officer in fear of physical injury. http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5650000083.HTM

Do you know if if it is legal to release an individual's juvenile record after they are deceased? There was discussion much earlier on thread #8 about this.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

"Into his front" ... You see in an anatomical position the ventral side of your arm is front. Ventral = front. However because of the mobility of the arm anatomy, the resting position of your arm has this side facing BACK. This has been spoken of numerous times all over MSM by differing experts.

I'm going to ask some "what if's", ok? This is not directed as questions to any specific poster but a generalized host of questions to get a grasp at the tone & sentiment of what divides us.

What if all of the bullets entered into the front of MB? Would you accept that account by unbiased authorities/experts or would you still challenge that?
What if it is deemed appropriate for an officer to take deadly force action against a physical threat---would you be able to ever feel that is reasonable? Or do you hate police that much?
What if you were to find that people resent how much money was wasted (taxpayer money) to defend a place like Fergus*n when their own town needs books for school children? Is the resentment reasonable.
What if people don't like to be called hateful names due to something that happened decades ago & they had no dog in that fight?
What if no sympathy is garnered for MB's mouthing back at police when the "knapsack privileged" would never think about doing such a fool hearted thing?

The true learning is in the Q & A.

 

[JLSChook]

I don't know about anybody else but I don't want anything to support "what I want"....I want the truth and facts that are being posted here on a daily basis. I think I'll stick with those.

(ie: LE statements, real and factual LAWS, Autopsy report by the actual doctor, etc...)

 

[tlcya]

Just wanted to let you all know I am working on a Media thread now. It will take me a while, I am going thru all the threads and gathering them up.

Thank you so much! I know the work involved in this endeavour and you are a blessing for taking the time to do this Ima.

Actually it was Parcells that said it was possible

BBM for emphasis

BBM

Not only "to," but the autopsy report(s) I read all said "from the front". That's a critical distinction for Forensic Pathologists.

(I hope we can all agree that Parcell's endless comments about one or two possibly from the back are worth the non-paper his non-creds are not written on. )

"Into his front" ... You see in an anatomical position the ventral side of your arm is front. Ventral = front. However because of the mobility of the arm anatomy, the resting position of your arm has this side facing BACK. This has been spoken of numerous times all over MSM by differing experts.

And the source is a man I and many others consider a non expert who presents himself as one

Didn't Nancy grace ask parcells "how does a bullet make a u-turn" when he was explaining the "one shot to the arm could have come from behind."

IF one watches the press conference, and I am sorry I am not linking it again as I have linked things at request numerous time only to have them ignored by the requesting party and then requested yet again (not specific to you just jumping off), so I will not be providing that link again, you will see that respected accredited expert Baden does not say anything of the sort. Rather the unaccredited Parcells, who is regarded with high suspicion and disdain by ACTUAL accredited experts in this field, says that ONE shot MAY have come from behind and it was a non fatal wound to the arm.

ETA forgive me for being underwhelmed

 

[Lovejac]

Didn't they tell the officer they were not getting out the street b/c they were close to their destination?

If they told him that and then all the rest happened I think any cop would assume that if he is heading off there is a likelihood of him grabbing a weapon at the destination and coming back. He already hit officer at least once why would anyone think they were done.

Great thought. I hadn't even considered that scenario. Office Wilson also could have worried that he might be bringing other people with him.

 

[LambChop]

If you state that something is a fact you have to provide a link. If a MOD asks you to provide a link it is mandatory that you do so.

Thanks, Lambchop

 

[jggordo]

BTW: That Senator is back on CNN AC360 right now. <modsnip> Now that she told the Governor to F Off we'll see what she's going to add to it.

JMO

 

[Ms Suzanne]

Can some please tell me or give me a link or transcript to what this latest witness says.

 

[bettybaby00]

Sorry. It is hard for me to follow that line of thought. What has happened to accountability for your actions? Wouldn't it be a felony attacking LE and trying to get his/her gun? My opinion is when LE is attacked by suspect, LE has to decide if his own life is in danger. Just my opinion.

Actually it's not just your opinion, it's the law.

Supreme Court case to shape Ferguson investigation

a 1989 Supreme Court decision has become the prism for evaluating how police use force. As soon as Ferguson, Missouri, police officer Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown on Aug. 9, the Graham v. Connor case became the foundational test for whether Wilson's response was appropriate or criminal.

To most civilians, an 18-year-old unarmed man may not appear to pose a deadly threat. But a police officer's perspective is different. And that is how an officer should be judged after the fact, Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote in the 1989 opinion.

"The 'reasonableness' of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight," Rehnquist wrote.

The sequence of events that led to the death of Brown, a black man shot by a white officer, remains unclear. An autopsy paid for by Brown's family concluded that he was shot six times, twice in the head. The shooting has prompted multiple investigations and triggered days of rioting reflecting long-simmering racial tensions in a town of mostly black residents and a majority white police force.


A grand jury is hearing evidence to determine whether Wilson, 28, who has policed the St. Louis suburbs for six years, should be charged in Brown's death.

The key question will be: Would a reasonable police officer, with a similar background as Wilson, have responded the same way? The answer is typically yes.

"Except in the most outrageous cases of police misconduct, juries tend to side with police officers and give them a lot of leeway," said Woody Connette.

Emphasis mine

http://www.wftv.com/ap/ap/political...e-ferguson-investigation/ng6qX/?__federated=1

 

[bwt42]

Didn't Nancy grace ask parcells "how does a bullet make a u-turn" when he was explaining the "one shot to the arm could have come from behind."

The "u-turn" statement did come from NG. However I don't think she was referring to a Parcells statement. There was another patholigist participating in the discussion & he suggested the shot to the eye could have driven his head down so that his head was down when the last shot was fired. This is when she said "oh, you mean the bullet took a u-tern".

 

[AuburnTxTiger]

I don't know about anybody else but I don't want anything to support "what I want"....I want the truth and facts that are being posted here on a daily basis. I think I'll stick with those.

(ie: LE statements, real and factual LAWS, Autopsy report by the actual doctor, etc...)

Unfortunately, I don't think some in our society are looking for the truth. Some have agendas they follow. I am appalled that some people categorically say all LE are crooked. This is just my opinion. Like you, I am trying to find the facts and am relying on main stream media reports to support statements made in this thread. I am even trying to understand those who have different views than I have. My opinion has totally changed after reading the provided main stream media links. Again I will say I have learned a tremendous amount by reading hours and hours of statements with links main stream media links provided as proof. I am sending a huge thank you to all the posters who have spent even more hours researching and looking for the facts and then posting statements back by hard, true main stream media articles/TV videos. In my opinion, most of us here are trying to be open minded in reviewing this case.

 

[LambChop]

I provided links. I give up. You will all see what you want to see. I explained the logic... Why a shot to the front could really mean shot to the back when we are talking about the arms. but 98% of you have your mind made up. Nothing I can do. I tried. Night all

You have not provided any links even though I have asked you numerous times. The only link provided had nothing to do with what has been requested by posters.

 

[TexanMom]

I provided links. I give up. You will all see what you want to see. I explained the logic... Why a shot to the front could really mean shot to the back when we are talking about the arms. but 98% of you have your mind made up. Nothing I can do. I tried. Night all

I'm sorry, I'm not following you. Are you trying say that MB's back was facing the officer when he was shot?

 

[AuburnTxTiger]

Prof. Parcells said a wound on Brown’s right arm was “consistent with a witness statement” that Brown was first shot while facing away from Wilson, but he stressed that he and Dr. Baden could not determine conclusively the trajectories of the bullets that hit Brown—or which direction he was moving—when he was shot. The wounds “could be consistent with going forward or going backward,” Dr. Baden said.

If you would take the time to read thread #8, you would see all the negative main stream media concerning Parcells. I know reading all the posts and links are time consuming, but it is very rewarding in gaining knowledge about this case. Even the "Professor" is being questioned. Parcells questionable credentials was discussed with links provided for hours on end in the previous thread. Please read about Parcells. You could even google his name and find all the articles.